ALPA: Don't raise retirement age
#51
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,877
Likes: 194
The current situation is quite different with ICAO remaining at 65. The FAA can at least go into the courtroom with a straight face and claim it’s a safety issue which is a allowed reason to discriminate on the basis of age. It would also be very difficult for many if not most airlines to schedule pilots between 65 and 67 to fly domestic only.
#52
They make smart decisions when needed. Age 65 came about because ICAO raised their age to 65 and the FAA agreed it was safe for those pilots to fly in the US system. At that point it was game, set, match for the age to go up in the US. There was zero probability of winning in court to maintain age 60 against any of the discrimination lawsuits. Letting a judge rule would have been a disaster so ALPA did the best they could do by supporting legislation that mitigated age 65 to the maximum possible.
The current situation is quite different with ICAO remaining at 65. The FAA can at least go into the courtroom with a straight face and claim it’s a safety issue which is a allowed reason to discriminate on the basis of age. It would also be very difficult for many if not most airlines to schedule pilots between 65 and 67 to fly domestic only.
The current situation is quite different with ICAO remaining at 65. The FAA can at least go into the courtroom with a straight face and claim it’s a safety issue which is a allowed reason to discriminate on the basis of age. It would also be very difficult for many if not most airlines to schedule pilots between 65 and 67 to fly domestic only.
#54
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2022
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
If a younger person asks me about becoming an airline pilot, I generally steer them clear of the career and advise to do other work. From lousy pay through years of "dues paying", a sensitive industry to economic conditions, and too much time away from loved ones, the career is just not worth it.
It may be a good fit for some, but I find the majority of young people I have spoken too would last in the industry. It's just not worth it even if you like flying.
It may be a good fit for some, but I find the majority of young people I have spoken too would last in the industry. It's just not worth it even if you like flying.
#55
Prime Minister/Moderator

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 45,115
Likes: 795
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Actually it did, because up until about the turn of the century (the rise of then RJs), you needed 1500-2500 hours to get an airline job anyway due to market forces.
But them the RJ's came and they started putting wet commercial noobs into regional jets, with CA's who were often on the very young side as well. The ATP rule was an adaption to the new paradigm.
Yes, there were a few points in time when the majors hired wet commercials in the very distant past, but they had flight engineers and airline safety was a quite different landscape 50-60 years ago. Not apples to oranges. Today we are in a hopefully sustainable era of exceptionally low fatal accident rates.
I wouldn't use a 1965 classic car as a daily driver with my kids either.
But them the RJ's came and they started putting wet commercial noobs into regional jets, with CA's who were often on the very young side as well. The ATP rule was an adaption to the new paradigm.
Yes, there were a few points in time when the majors hired wet commercials in the very distant past, but they had flight engineers and airline safety was a quite different landscape 50-60 years ago. Not apples to oranges. Today we are in a hopefully sustainable era of exceptionally low fatal accident rates.
I wouldn't use a 1965 classic car as a daily driver with my kids either.
#56
Banned
Joined: Mar 2020
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
alpa has officially adopted a resolution opposing any attempts to increase the retirement age for professional airline pilots.
Source:
https://aerocrewnews.com/aviation-ne...irline-pilots/
Source:
https://aerocrewnews.com/aviation-ne...irline-pilots/
#57
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2016
Posts: 2,607
Likes: 12
Obviously increased CBA compensation is good for us. That would be my choice if it were up to me. Duh.
But while that might attract the interest of more noobs, there's not a big difference between $200K- 300K from the perspective of a teenager or college grad... anything in that range is pretty good. Problem is they still have to bridge the 1500 hour valley. A lot of time and money invested, with some uncertainty as to the ultimate outcome. There are a lot of people out there who don't have aviation friends or family, and thus have no idea how to go about it.
With an airline owned or sponsored training program, the airlines could get ab initio pilots to the regionals for about $150K each... so the cost of a junior legacy FO for one year.
Remember regionals are already throwing around cumulative bonuses in that range anyway (and mainline is ultimately footing the bill). If you do sponsored ab initio, the student is obligated to serve X number of years at your regional and/or mainline as payback.
The current regional bonuses are just fighting for qualified pilots. Ab initio would attract new pilots. Especially since they don't have to take a lot of responsibility on themselves, other than complete training.
But this is just discussion, the ship has already sailed and it would probably take the majors several years to get something like this set up. They might even have to get the mfgs to increase production of ASEL trainers to have enough capacity. They assumed the GA industry would step up on their own, and of course they could not. COVID-induced industry uncertainty probably spooked a few potential students as well (mu cousin's husband bailed on his flight training in early 2020).
But while that might attract the interest of more noobs, there's not a big difference between $200K- 300K from the perspective of a teenager or college grad... anything in that range is pretty good. Problem is they still have to bridge the 1500 hour valley. A lot of time and money invested, with some uncertainty as to the ultimate outcome. There are a lot of people out there who don't have aviation friends or family, and thus have no idea how to go about it.
With an airline owned or sponsored training program, the airlines could get ab initio pilots to the regionals for about $150K each... so the cost of a junior legacy FO for one year.
Remember regionals are already throwing around cumulative bonuses in that range anyway (and mainline is ultimately footing the bill). If you do sponsored ab initio, the student is obligated to serve X number of years at your regional and/or mainline as payback.
The current regional bonuses are just fighting for qualified pilots. Ab initio would attract new pilots. Especially since they don't have to take a lot of responsibility on themselves, other than complete training.
But this is just discussion, the ship has already sailed and it would probably take the majors several years to get something like this set up. They might even have to get the mfgs to increase production of ASEL trainers to have enough capacity. They assumed the GA industry would step up on their own, and of course they could not. COVID-induced industry uncertainty probably spooked a few potential students as well (mu cousin's husband bailed on his flight training in early 2020).
#59
On Reserve
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
It’s not about just pay and QOL. It’s a vision of a stable career for those looking to join. The fact that airlines whipsaw and furlough so easily causes many to avoid this industry.
#60
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 661
Likes: 0
How many of these ATP holders are over 65 and how many have Corporate Jobs. We need these stats to prove/dis-prove the surplus of ATP’s data
Last edited by CFIsoonToBeFO; 05-25-2022 at 06:22 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post



